Plausible arguments may be _advanced_, for rejecting _neuter_ and
passive verbs; but they have been found to be so convenient in
practice, that the theory which recognises them, has stood the test
of ages. If you tell the young learner, that, in the following
expressions, The church _rests_ on its foundation; The book _lies_
on the desk; The boys _remain (are)_ idle, the nouns _church, book_,
and _boys_, are represented as acting, and, therefore, the verbs
_rests, lies, remain_, and _are_, are _active_, he will not believe
you, because there is no action that is apparent to his senses. And
should you proceed further, and, by a labored and metaphysical
investigation and development of the laws of motion, attempt to
prove to him that "every portion of matter is influenced by
different, active principles, tending to produce change," and,
therefore, every thing in universal nature is _always_ acting, it is
not at all probable, that you could convince his _understanding_, in
opposition to the dearer testimony of his senses. Of what avail to
learners is a theory which they cannot comprehend?
Among the various theorists and speculative writers on philosophical
grammar, the ingenious Horne Tooke stands pre-eminent; but,
unfortunately, his principal speculations on the verb, have never
met the public eye. William S. Cardell has also rendered himself
conspicuous in the philological field, by taking a bolder stand than
any of his predecessors. His view of the verb is novel, and
ingeniously supported. The following is the substance of his theory